Disney confirms 'Frozen' makeover coming to Epcot's Norway Pavilion

[Pirate665]

Let's all kinda be frank at this point. We all pretty much agree Frozen is here to stay. But, its placement in Epcot is not entirely wise. There's a crowd who think it should go to Studios and another MK. And of course some who think it fits in Epcot but that Norway is a poor fit to just reface.

Now that we are all on the same page again, I think we should ask ourselves, what will this ride teach children?

What's its end goal?

Cause it's not a tie in to tourism for Norway, al-la China or Japan... And it's not looking like it'll teach about future technologies. (Though I think that idea blew itself out the window with NAF.)

And finally, can the area really cope with the sudden increase in flow?

But really, one final question I have is how do the international college programmers working there feel about it? This is how their county is gonna look to, quite frankly, Americans and other tourists visiting the park.

P.s. Just posted the new photo in chit chat section...

 

[AEfx]

Lavish attractions that connect with people years after their demolition are the result of heart and ideas. If there is nothing beyond the rides then you're not questioning the validity of the romance around EPCOT Center but the entire construct of themed entertainment as a distinct medium. Because it seems as far as you are concerned attractions and experiences cannot evoke a genuine response, that those responses are only the product of duplicitous marketing. Yeah, there is no way to objectively prove otherwise, but it seems relying on the marketing would be a lot easier and cheaper. It also seems the experience museums should be falling on their faces since they lack the marketing might of a Disney.

/sigh

I don't know how many times I can say "it's not the attractions, they were amazing".

What is a product of marketing is that somehow they all added up to this whole nebulous theme that no one can actually quantify beyond marketing statements. Everything was so loosely tied together yet folks insist now that it was a very specific theme that is subject to violation when in fact it's really about them not spending lavishly on attractions anymore.

That's all.

Also, there is a World's Fair going on right now.

Yes, there is - although we don't call them "World's Fairs" anymore, the current one is an "Expo" and they are generally referred to as "Universal Exhibitions".

I was referring to the classical "World's Fair" that Future World was based upon, which were largely trade shows for exhibitions of technology. The current equivalent to "World's Fair" is more akin to World Showcase, focusing on culture, and has been since Walt's time.

 

[AEfx]

Cause it's not a tie in to tourism for Norway

Actually, despite the denials here, it certainly seems it will function that way - link1 link2 link3.

 

[Matt_Black]

Actually, despite the denials here, it certainly seems it will function that way - link1 link2 link3.

According to a recent article about Frozen in The Daily Mail, there's been an overall 37% increase.

 

[Pirate665]

Actually, despite the denials here, it certainly seems it will function that way - link1 link2 link3.

Well frost my behind. I take that part back in part. But really, that's sad because Norway has given the world so much before.

Its the same way I am glad I'm visiting Iceland this year because I'm fascinated with its history and not so vauge movie tie in. And not Bjork...

 

[Matt_Black]

Well frost my behind. I take that part back in part. But really, that's sad because Norway has given the world so much before.

Its the same way I am glad I'm visiting Iceland this year because I'm fascinated with its history and not so vauge movie tie in. And not Bjork...

It's not like it's unique to Norway. Scotland received a massive tourism boost from Brave, so much so that they started sponsoring a booth at the Food & Wine Festival.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I don't know how many times I can say "it's not the attractions, they were amazing".

What is a product of marketing is that somehow they all added up to this whole nebulous theme that no one can actually quantify beyond marketing statements. Everything was so loosely tied together yet folks insist now that it was a very specific theme that is subject to violation when in fact it's really about them not spending lavishly on attractions anymore.

The attractions are the primary means by which any meaning is to be conveyed. Something made them amazing and if lavishness were the true criteria there would be no complaints because lavish is where Disney still consistently excels. Lavish is also not how any sane person would describe Maelstrom.

Loose connections do not disprove a notion of thematic consistency. But even if there was never anything there but marketing fluff, the delusion more consistently produced something more enjoyable.

Yes, there is - although we don't call them "World's Fairs" anymore, the current one is an "Expo" and they are generally referred to as "Universal Exhibitions".

I was referring to the classical "World's Fair" that Future World was based upon, which were largely trade shows for exhibitions of technology. The current equivalent to "World's Fair" is more akin to World Showcase, focusing on culture, and has been since Walt's time.

Expo is the older, proper term according to the BIE and the World Showcase elements were always there. There very first one was even called The Great Exhibition of the Works of Industry of all Nations. The 1964-1965 New York World's Fair is only ever consistently called a World's Fair and never an Expo because it was an unsanctioned event.

 

[Sped2424]

On a positive note, we don't have to worry about any more World Showcase rides getting a character theme.

True this is the last one. But I could see donald and the gang going way of the dodo soon if Pixar's Dia De Los muertos film gets any love. Not that it would matter much considering the 3 caballero's are already a character overlay, in fact I would rather have the Dia de los muertos film in there.

 

[lazyboy97o]

True this is the last one. But I could see donald and the gang going way of the dodo soon if Pixar's Dia De Los muertos film gets any love. Not that it would matter much considering the 3 caballero's are already a character overlay, in fact I would rather have the Dia de los muertos film in there.

At this point that connection is not really different than the Three Caballeros or even Frozen.

 

[Sped2424]

At this point that connection is not really different than the Three Caballeros or even Frozen.

Well we haven't seen any material on what the film would be like so to put it in the same vein as the other two is a bit premature if you ask me. If it focuses on the very real holiday in Mexico and highlights the real traditions that occur there then it's already has Frozen beat by miles in terms of authenticity (Arendelle does not equate to norway, but Dia de los Muertos set in Mexico is a real place/tradition). And given the lack of anything really authentic other than a few shots of Mexico in the current attraction if an overlay is focused on us visiting Mexico during the day of the dead I think that's an attraction that I can forgive being tied in by a cartoon property. Regardless of where it was made. So it is or at least has the possibility of being very different from those two properties.

 

[FigmentJedi]

You're history has some serious gaps. The EPCOT idea continued to be developed and explored throughout the 1970s. The "two models" being pushed together was actually the EPCOT Theme Centers (Walt Disney World's was to be the first of multiple) and World Showcase endeavors being shrunk down. The two parks were not competing ideas, but simultaneous endeavors. It was that work throughout the 1970s that got people excited, as the EPCOT film was not being widely shown. It was that pushing the company to the edge of ruin to get it built that excited people. That is optimism. The opening of EPCOT Center was big news.

Additionally, the two Theme Centers were inspirationally drawn from Walt's plans.

World Showcase was based on the international mall that would have been part of the city's central ring and Future World's early technological showcase conceit was drawn from the public parts of Epcot's Industrial park.

 

[articos]

I think Epcot Center had a cohesive vision, well two cohesive visions. When I brought my two youngest children, they were most fascinated with Epcot. We, relative WDW newbies, only bought standard "one day one park tickets" for the three parks open at the time. We stayed three nights. We drove down from Wisconsin in a mini-van. We stayed at Caribbean Beach, then drove home. Well, with one sideline...they handed us tickets to AK at the front desk when we checked in. It was February. AK didn't open until April. We went the morning of checkout for the morning.

Anyway, I digress. The children, boy 9 and girl 11 spent so much time at Innoventions, I was concerned we wouldn't have time for rides. There was a replica Mars rover on display with NASA peeps doing a demonstration. The kids loved the countries...not the lame "Kid-Cot" craft stuff, the countries. It instilled in them a love of travel and desire to see the real world. The cartoonification of Epcot WS is a wasted opportunity to instill in children, a desire to explore. It is, after all, the desire to make sense of and manipulate our environment that makes us human beings in the first place.

That was Epcot to me in a nutshell. Inspiration. Period.

Lavish attractions that connect with people years after their demolition are the result of heart and ideas. If there is nothing beyond the rides then you're not questioning the validity of the romance around EPCOT Center but the entire construct of themed entertainment as a distinct medium. Because it seems as far as you are concerned attractions and experiences cannot evoke a genuine response, that those responses are only the product of duplicitous marketing. Yeah, there is no way to objectively prove otherwise, but it seems relying on the marketing would be a lot easier and cheaper. It also seems the experience museums should be falling on their faces since they lack the marketing might of a Disney.

Also, there is a World's Fair going on right now.

I love both of these posts.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Well we haven't seen any material on what the film would be like so to put it in the same vein as the other two is a bit premature if you ask me. If it focuses on the very real holiday in Mexico and highlights the real traditions that occur there then it's already has Frozen beat by miles in terms of authenticity (Arendelle does not equate to norway, but Dia de los Muertos set in Mexico is a real place/tradition). And given the lack of anything really authentic other than a few shots of Mexico in the current attraction if an overlay is focused on us visiting Mexico during the day of the dead I think that's an attraction that I can forgive being tied in by a cartoon property. Regardless of where it was made. So it is or at least has the possibility of being very different from those two properties.

Three Caballeros was rooted in the notion of cultural exchange (motive and efficacy are a different matter) but none of that made it to the attraction. People swore up and down that this attraction would be some sort of guided tour, and it is not. The idea of characters driving something bigger just has not really been demonstrated by Disney.

 

[FigmentJedi]

Well we haven't seen any material on what the film would be like so to put it in the same vein as the other two is a bit premature if you ask me. If it focuses on the very real holiday in Mexico and highlights the real traditions that occur there then it's already has Frozen beat by miles in terms of authenticity (Arendelle does not equate to norway, but Dia de los Muertos set in Mexico is a real place/tradition). And given the lack of anything really authentic other than a few shots of Mexico in the current attraction if an overlay is focused on us visiting Mexico during the day of the dead I think that's an attraction that I can forgive being tied in by a cartoon property. Regardless of where it was made. So it is or at least has the possibility of being very different from those two properties.

My position on Gran Fiesta is that really, the original El Rio Del Tiempo and the third act of the Three Caballeros film were functionally the same thing: A surreal travelogue through Mexico with a Mary Blair-inspired holiday interlude (Los Posadas in the movie, and Dias de los Muertos in the ride which is one of the things that's intact from the overlay).

Gran Fiesta continues being a Mexican travelogue with the trio, even with its less then inspired "Donald's lost" plot.
That said, I'm curious to see how Pixar's Dias de los Muertos film turns out or how it stacks up to Book of Life.

 

[AEfx]

It's not like it's unique to Norway. Scotland received a massive tourism boost from Brave, so much so that they started sponsoring a booth at the Food & Wine Festival.

True, but one of the "waves" of criticism about the location (as soon as one is debunked, like a Jedi - there was...another) was "Arendelle is FICTIONAL, are you an idiot?" in saying that it was a preposterous notion for it to be in Norway. Yet...the public sure thinks so, and the filmmakers (unless they are lying?) have described in great length how yes, it's a fictional kingdom but there are countless connections and models based on Norway and historic Norwegian locations.

And then you have people who don't understand Norwegian history, who make such pithy sound bites as "It's a fictional kingdom based on a story by a Danish guy" and don't realize that actually, when Hans Christen Andersen was born, Denmark and Norway were united (as Denmark-Norway) - as was Norway and Sweden later when "The Snow Queen" was written. These countries are inexorably linked and functioned more like states than independent countries culturally and shifted several times during his lifetime. Norway wasn't independent until the early 1900's, thirty years after Hans Christen Anderson was dead. Certainly long after the trolls and Scandinavian gods...

Thematically, it's as appropriate as Maelstrom was - a fantasy ride based with roots in Scandinavian folklore/stories, it's just that...characters...ew....because somewhere hidden in Epcot is a stone tablet that says "Characters do not belong here!" that Disney has been violating in one way or another since the 1980's.

Finally, we've arrived at the consensus that the issue is really capacity - but it took a long time before we got there and folks finally had something solid to complain about.

 

[AEfx]

That was Epcot to me in a nutshell. Inspiration. Period.

Which is great and I don't disagree that certainly was there.

I'm not making everything at Epcot out to be completely soulless, or without purpose - I loved EPCOT and it's attractions. It's just this cohesiveness that people have projected upon it that was a fiction.

You have post after post of people who talk about Epcot and judge what does or does not belong based upon notions of "what Epcot is" when it's always been a very fluid, broad concept. "Inspiration" can cover just about anything, for example.

It's that folks have their own specific interpretations of Epcot that vary quite widely - because it was a nebulous concept to begin with. They tend to post so passionately about it (which definitely speaks for itself - there was something to it, even if that something was different to many of us) that they fill in spaces with notions that really weren't there. With this ethereal design - that when you break things down (for instance, the history of The Land as posted earlier in this thread) doesn't really hold up as folks think. Like it was some bastion of perfection created by a mysterious deity.

I also see just so much anger from people, true angst and heartache - and it's like...the 1980's are gone. At this point, even if everything one believes about EPCOT's past is true, it's not coming back. If Darth Iger disappeared tomorrow and the magical CEO of everyone's dreams showed up...it still wouldn't. People are going to go to their graves waiting for something specific that isn't going to happen, and miss what is there and blocks any enjoyment of what could come. It's like that friend who has been waiting for an engagement ring...when she's been waiting the better part of three decades, sometimes some hard truths need to be told.

 

[Mike S]

Which is great and I don't disagree that certainly was there.

I'm not making everything at Epcot out to be completely soulless, or without purpose - I loved EPCOT and it's attractions. It's just this cohesiveness that people have projected upon it that was a fiction.

You have post after post of people who talk about Epcot and judge what does or does not belong based upon notions of "what Epcot is" when it's always been a very fluid, broad concept. "Inspiration" can cover just about anything, for example.

It's that folks have their own specific interpretations of Epcot that vary quite widely - because it was a nebulous concept to begin with. They tend to post so passionately about it (which definitely speaks for itself - there was something to it, even if that something was different to many of us) that they fill in spaces with notions that really weren't there. With this ethereal design - that when you break things down (for instance, the history of The Land as posted earlier in this thread) doesn't really hold up as folks think. Like it was some bastion of perfection created by a mysterious deity.

I also see just so much anger from people, true angst and heartache - and it's like...the 1980's are gone. At this point, even if everything one believes about EPCOT's past is true, it's not coming back. If Darth Iger disappeared tomorrow and the magical CEO of everyone's dreams showed up...it still wouldn't. People are going to go to their graves waiting for something specific that isn't going to happen, and miss what is there and blocks any enjoyment of what could come. It's like that friend who has been waiting for an engagement ring...when she's been waiting the better part of three decades, sometimes some hard truths need to be told.

We don't have to make ourselves forget the past and enjoy what's coming to Epcot. Thankfully unlike that friend and engagement ring we still have other theme park options that could make us happy beyond wanting for Epcot to return to being more like EPCOT Center.

 

[Darth Sidious]

Modern Disney still exceeds my expectations. I expect them to build mediocre attractions really slowly. And I am always blown away with how slowly Disney builds. And I am really impressed with the level of mediocrity they have achieved.

You go, Mickey!

 

[FigmentJedi]

True, but one of the "waves" of criticism about the location (as soon as one is debunked, like a Jedi - there was...another) was "Arendelle is FICTIONAL, are you an idiot?" in saying that it was a preposterous notion for it to be in Norway. Yet...the public sure thinks so, and the filmmakers (unless they are lying?) have described in great length how yes, it's a fictional kingdom but there are countless connections and models based on Norway and historic Norwegian locations.

And then you have people who don't understand Norwegian history, who make such pithy sound bites as "It's a fictional kingdom based on a story by a Danish guy" and don't realize that actually, when Hans Christen Andersen was born, Denmark and Norway were united (as Denmark-Norway) - as was Norway and Sweden later when "The Snow Queen" was written. These countries are inexorably linked and functioned more like states than independent countries culturally and shifted several times during his lifetime. Norway wasn't independent until the early 1900's, thirty years after Hans Christen Anderson was dead. Certainly long after the trolls and Scandinavian gods...

Thematically, it's as appropriate as Maelstrom was - a fantasy ride based with roots in Scandinavian folklore/stories, it's just that...characters...ew....because somewhere hidden in Epcot is a stone tablet that says "Characters do not belong here!" that Disney has been violating in one way or another since the 1980's.

Finally, we've arrived at the consensus that the issue is really capacity - but it took a long time before we got there and folks finally had something solid to complain about.

Problem is Frozen's a bastardized Disney Princess marketing oriented (Because why else would it be two princesses who have trouble connecting instead of a young non-royal girl going out to save a boy) version of the Snow Queen that has barely anything to do with the original material.
That's a bit far removed from Scandinavian culture.

 

[Matt_Black]

Problem is Frozen's a bastardized Disney Princess marketing oriented (Because why else would it be two princesses who have trouble connecting instead of a young non-royal girl going out to save a boy) version of the Snow Queen that has barely anything to do with the original material.
That's a bit far removed from Scandinavian culture.

Except they're not in the Disney Princess line-up.